Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 6, 2026

Standardized Technique of Aortic Valve Re-implantation for Valve-sparing Aortic Root Replacement
Published on: December 11, 2017
Regression in left ventricular mass after aortic valve replacement for chronic aortic regurgitation is unrelated to
Morgan L Brown1, Hartzell V Schaff, Rakesh M Suri
1Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Insights
Prosthesis-patient mismatch does not impact left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement for aortic regurgitation. Greater regression occurs in patients with higher preoperative left ventricular mass, though normalization is not always achieved.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Cardiac Surgery
- Echocardiography
Background:
- Chronic aortic regurgitation leads to left ventricular (LV) volume overload.
- Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is performed to correct this, aiming for LV remodeling.
- Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) may influence post-operative outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the impact of PPM on LV mass regression after AVR for chronic aortic regurgitation.
- To identify predictors of LV mass regression in this patient population.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing AVR for chronic aortic regurgitation.
- Exclusion criteria included moderate/severe aortic stenosis, CABG, or mitral valve surgery.
- Preoperative and follow-up echocardiograms were used to measure LV mass and assess PPM.
Main Results:
- LV mass regression averaged 50 ± 38 g/m(2) at 3.2 ± 2.4 years post-AVR.
- Regression was independent of indexed prosthetic valve area and PPM.
- Higher preoperative LV mass was the strongest predictor of greater LV mass regression (P < .001).
Conclusions:
- LV mass regression after AVR for aortic regurgitation is not influenced by indexed prosthetic valve area or PPM.
- The extent of regression is primarily determined by the initial degree of LV hypertrophy.
- Despite significant regression, LV mass may not normalize in patients with severe preoperative hypertrophy.
Objectives:
We examined the role of prosthesis-patient mismatch on left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement for chronic aortic valve regurgitation.
Methods:
We selected patients who had complete preoperative and follow-up echocardiograms with measurement of left ventricular mass. Patients were excluded who had moderate or greater aortic valve stenosis, concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting, or mitral valve procedures.
Results:
Patients' mean age was 55 ± 17 years; 21% were female. The mean preoperative indexed left ventricular mass was 150 ± 45 g/m(2). Patients with mildly (n = 44; mean indexed mass, 126 ± 15 g/m(2)), moderately (n = 31; mean indexed mass, 168 ± 11 g/m(2)), or severely (n = 15; mean indexed mass, 241 ± 34 g/m(2)) increased preoperative indexed left ventricular mass, were similar, except for lower ejection fractions, larger end-diastolic dimensions, and larger ventricular wall thicknesses in the severely enlarged group (P < .001). Thirteen patients had prosthesis-patient mismatch and were similar to patients without prosthesis-patient mismatch, except for a greater body surface area, fewer mechanical valves, and smaller valve sizes in those with prosthesis-patient mismatch (P < .05). At a mean follow-up of 3.2 ± 2.4 years, the average reduction in indexed left ventricular mass was 50 ± 38 g/m(2); late mass regression was unrelated to labeled valve size, prosthesis-patient mismatch, or measured indexed effective aortic valve area. A greater preoperative indexed left ventricular mass (P < .001) was an independent predictor of greater left ventricular mass regression. Despite having greater left ventricular mass regression, patients with severe preoperative indexed left ventricular mass did not return to normal values (mean, 142 ± 25 g/m(2)).
Conclusions:
Left ventricular mass regression after aortic valve replacement for chronic aortic regurgitation is unrelated to indexed prosthetic valve area. Although incomplete, regression is greatest in patients with the largest preoperative indexed left ventricular mass.
Related Concept Videos
Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Aortic Regurgitation I: Introduction
Aortic Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Mitral Regurgitation I: Introduction
Mitral Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Aortic Regurgitation IV: Nursing Management

